Science and the MPA's - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

Aaron · 05-09-2010, 09:54 AM

I just spent 20 minutes doing a write up and bumped the wrong button on my little netbook keyboard and watched it all go away. friggin bummer...I'll redo the write up but just know that the bulk of the scientists there were also fisherman, spearos, and divers and do not support just shutting down access. I'll give you a set of #'s that I think you'll like before I burn this netbook for having the refresh key in a stupid location...

There are 1.7 million saltwater anglers that go on about 5.8 million trips in a given year. There are about 380 charters operating in the state which are responsible for taking a significant portion of those anglers on those trips. Fishing brings $2.2 BILLION to the state economy, $160 million to state and local taxes, $20 million in the form of excise taxes on hard goods and provides jobs for more than 20,000 California residents. And this is not LA times data...That data comes from a little organization called NOAA. Fishing is vital to this state which was the point of the NOAA fisheries service talk. 'nuff said.

PAL · 05-09-2010, 10:16 AM

Quote:

There are 1.7 million saltwater anglers that go on about 5.8 million trips in a given year. There are about 380 charters operating in the state which are responsible for taking a significant portion of those anglers on those trips. Fishing brings $2.2 BILLION to the state economy, $160 million to state and local taxes, $20 million in the form of excise taxes on hard goods and provides jobs for more than 20,000 California residents. And this is not LA times data...That data comes from a little organization called NOAA. Fishing is vital to this state which was the point of the NOAA fisheries service talk. 'nuff said.

Not new info, although the reminder is always nice to see. Too bad most fisheries and marine ecology scientists who disagree with the scientific underpinnings and justification for the MLPA (like the members of your panel) lack the moral courage to take a stand against the corporate greenwashers.

The MLPA is an end run around NOAA and their management based scheme. And even NOAA is no safety net for recreational anglers these days, but remains a political battleground. In practice, all environmental policy is politically determined.

I don't suppose your laptop is an HP?

Aaron · 05-09-2010, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PAL

Not new info, although the reminder is always nice to see. Too bad most fisheries and marine ecology scientists who disagree with the scientific underpinnings and justification for the MLPA (like the members of your panel) lack the moral courage to take a stand against the corporate greenwashers.

The MLPA is an end run around NOAA and their management based scheme. And even NOAA is no safety net for recreational anglers these days, but remains a political battleground. In practice, all environmental policy is politically determined.

I don't suppose your laptop is an HP?

I know not new info, but yes, important to see and I thought nice to see a good consolidated reminder that was the opening slide in a talk given by the NOAA fisheries service.

The only thing that I think I disagree with you on is that you called it "...your panel". Oh please oh please don't lump me in with any MLPA panel!

We've actually met in the past somewhere, can't remember where, maybe a mothership (?) but I did want to say thanks for all of your efforts as well with the mlpa process. I won't list out some big long letter of gratitude here, but thanks. Its appreciated by the entire fishing community...past, present and future. Hope to see you out there again some time. I owe you a cold one.

Even worse than an HP...eMachines! I just couldn't help myself when I saw that it was $230 at best buy!!

Billy V · 05-09-2010, 10:19 AM

Thank You..

We all appreciate your involvement. Many of us have given countless hours and dollars toward the mlpa fight. Its refreshing to be able to gain access to accurate data.

I believe the best way to thwart off vast MLPA Closures is to rid this state of Arnold Schwarzenegger, or anyone like him.

-Its time to vote them out of here.

Aaron · 05-09-2010, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy V

Thank You..

We all appreciate your involvement. Many of us have given countless hours and dollars toward the mlpa fight. Its refreshing to be able to gain access to accurate data.

I believe the best way to thwart off vast MLPA Closures is to rid this state of Arnold Schwarzenegger, or anyone like him.

-Its time to vote them out of here.

My involvement pales in comparison to all of you guys!

PAL · 05-10-2010, 04:51 PM

^ Sorry, I meant the panel you viewed as a spectator, not to imply you are part of the process. Any insight you can provide is much appreciated. Thanks for sharing your experiences, and hope to fish with you again sometime soon.

GregAndrew · 05-10-2010, 07:23 PM

Here is a question that no one seems to be able to answer. If 39% of species do better outside of reserves (PISCO Marine Reserves Handbook), then why was the reserve size science based on capturing 90% of the area species? They base their minimum and recommended reserve sizes on capturing 90% of the available species. This creates at least 2 problems: the costs associated with larger reserves than are necessary, and driving the 39% further from where they would want to be.

I would agree that there is a lot of science in the process on both sides, but little of it is being utilized in a scientific way by the powers that be.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-09-2010, 09:54 AM	#1
Aaron Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 175	I just spent 20 minutes doing a write up and bumped the wrong button on my little netbook keyboard and watched it all go away. friggin bummer...I'll redo the write up but just know that the bulk of the scientists there were also fisherman, spearos, and divers and do not support just shutting down access. I'll give you a set of #'s that I think you'll like before I burn this netbook for having the refresh key in a stupid location... There are 1.7 million saltwater anglers that go on about 5.8 million trips in a given year. There are about 380 charters operating in the state which are responsible for taking a significant portion of those anglers on those trips. Fishing brings $2.2 BILLION to the state economy, $160 million to state and local taxes, $20 million in the form of excise taxes on hard goods and provides jobs for more than 20,000 California residents. And this is not LA times data...That data comes from a little organization called NOAA. Fishing is vital to this state which was the point of the NOAA fisheries service talk. 'nuff said.

05-09-2010, 10:19 AM	#4
Billy V Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bay Ho Posts: 1,382	Thank You.. We all appreciate your involvement. Many of us have given countless hours and dollars toward the mlpa fight. Its refreshing to be able to gain access to accurate data. I believe the best way to thwart off vast MLPA Closures is to rid this state of Arnold Schwarzenegger, or anyone like him. -Its time to vote them out of here.

05-10-2010, 04:51 PM	#6
PAL Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 754	^ Sorry, I meant the panel you viewed as a spectator, not to imply you are part of the process. Any insight you can provide is much appreciated. Thanks for sharing your experiences, and hope to fish with you again sometime soon.

05-10-2010, 07:23 PM	#7
GregAndrew Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,384	Here is a question that no one seems to be able to answer. If 39% of species do better outside of reserves (PISCO Marine Reserves Handbook), then why was the reserve size science based on capturing 90% of the area species? They base their minimum and recommended reserve sizes on capturing 90% of the available species. This creates at least 2 problems: the costs associated with larger reserves than are necessary, and driving the 39% further from where they would want to be. I would agree that there is a lot of science in the process on both sides, but little of it is being utilized in a scientific way by the powers that be.